Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs Gemma 3 4B

Trinity Large Thinking leads Gemma 3 4B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.8 to 4.8, and Gemma 3 4B costs 10.7x less per output token ($0.075 vs $0.80 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 30 benchmarks have a result for both.

Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
10.8
Output $/M
$0.80
30
Gemma 3 4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
4.8
Output $/M
$0.075
0
vs boards won of 30 shared

Trinity Large Thinking or Gemma 3 4B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Trinity Large Thinking for a larger context window (262K against 131K tokens).

Shared results
30
Trinity Large Thinking only
22
Gemma 3 4B only
9
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Trinity Large Thinking not benchmarked, Gemma 3 4B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 85.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Trinity Large Thinking 90.1% against Gemma 3 4B 5.0%, 85.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against Gemma 3 4B $0.075 per million output tokens, 10.7x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, Gemma 3 4B 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryTrinity Large ThinkingBarsGemma 3 4BTies
Coding40
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Math20
Knowledge40
General130
All shared boards300
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
LMArena WebDev1238Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
AA Coding Index25.82.7Trinity Large Thinking
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured11.2%Only Gemma 3 4B measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%0.8%Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: coding13571230Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: software and IT13621269Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena WebDev: React1231Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1240Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.84.8Trinity Large Thinking
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured115.9Only Gemma 3 4B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%5.0%Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%29.1%Trinity Large Thinking
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%5.3%Trinity Large Thinking
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured23.2%Only Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421253Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: expert13591223Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561253Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured12.7Only Gemma 3 4B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured12.7%Only Gemma 3 4B measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured7.5%Only Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: math13651239Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501256Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured41.7%Only Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: science13551306Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491342Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: legal and government13451327Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: business and finance13291311Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
Design Arena: websites1137Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: UI components1045Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: game dev1079Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: data viz1098Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: 3D1082Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: all code categories1117Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: SVG1017Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1041Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index130
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
IFBench56.3%28.3%Trinity Large Thinking
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%6.7%Trinity Large Thinking
DTBenchNot measured50.9%Only Gemma 3 4B measured
LMCANot measured2.8%Only Gemma 3 4B measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text13401291Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: instruction following13261239Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: creative writing13081270Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: English13561300Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: non-English13251273Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Chinese1371Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: German13561281Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Japanese1312Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Korean1306Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: French1366Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1327Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Russian13381294Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Polish1312Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201255Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: longer queries13181273Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: writing and language13171288Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961233Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemma 3 4BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.0006Fits in one request
Gemma 3 4B$0.0001Fits in one request

Gemma 3 4B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
Gemma 3 4B$0.0025Fits in one request

Gemma 3 4B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
Gemma 3 4B$0.0097Exceeds the context window

Gemma 3 4B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Trinity Large Thinking and Gemma 3 4B
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingGoogle Gemma 3 4B
MakerArcee AIGoogle
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026March 13, 2025
Context window262K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.045
Output $/Mtok$0.80$0.075
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Gemma 3 4B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Trinity Large Thinking for a larger context window (262K against 131K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or Gemma 3 4B?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Gemma 3 4B costs $0.045 and $0.075. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or Gemma 3 4B?

Trinity Large Thinking, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs Gemma 3 4B comparison based on?

30 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Gemma 3 4B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next